seems to me, being an American hating communist is much better than being a fat, ignorant, misguided self-righteous, "my dollars are worth so much less compared to the euro", "I watch Fox News and think I am informed", "I really believe the war in Iraq is not about oil", laughingstock of the rest of the world American...
(I'm sorry, I moved to the United States recently, and missed the whole REAL ID Act legislation got passed in 2005)
I for one am definitely against anything "Big Brother". However, as far as I have been able to read up on this (a lot of articles have tons of fluff or otherwise useless information), I don't see the Big Brother angle or why people are so against a sort of national ID...
This is what I (think I) know:
1) all states should put the same information on the ID/license (in fact, there are only minimal guidelines, states could put more, but even if it would be a strict list (-> all of these and nothing but)). 2) all states should have the same (document) requirements to issue an ID/license. 3) states should share their motor vehicle database with the other states.
[Btw, The countries part of the European Union have a "unified" passport, in fact, apart from specification of country of origin (in several ways, some to help prevent counterfeits, most of which were demanded by the US after 9/11 (not meant as a complaint, just giving some "historical" information:-))) and nobody in Europe is complaining those passports are used to "track everyone".]
I guess my question is: what do people have against a national ID? Provided it is just that...meaning the 50 different state ID/license designs are replaced with one, uniform ID/license (for example with a map of the US on the background and the issuing state highlighted, as well as noted in writing on the ID/license), the same information is displayed in the same way, optionally additional information each state wishes to add is on the back, etc...
I don't see how just uniforming the information on and look of the ID/license would help or even facilitate "tracking" everyone...seems to be me it would be just as down right easy now, since my RI driver's license identifies me just as uniquely now as would a National driver's license (or my green card for that matter)
My main reason for asking is: as far as I can tell, there are no negative, only positive side-effects to a national ID/license (that assertion is based on what I know about it). Since so many are adamant against it, I feel I must be missing something, since I am at least as anti-Big Brother as the next guy:-)
by all means, turn the thing upside down...in fact, that's pretty much the only thing you can do......however it doesn't fly buddy.
People like you claim there is a God, so it's up to people like you to prove that God exists, not others who disagree to proof you're wrong. People like you are the ones making a claim (God exists) so the burden of proof is on you...
If you had your way, you can't complain about this one: I believe you are a pedophile..."If you'd like to refute that, I'll need proof that" you aren't. "Have fun with that."
Well, "us" in Western Europe value freedom of speech as well (in fact, one could argue we value freedom more in general, as in the past decade we don't seem to be passing many laws to limit the freedom of our citizens, but that's another discussion), yet there is no creationism museum over here...
nor are there any schools where darwinism is not taught or has to compete with creationism...
are you actually using the fact whether or not you can listen to radio on your mp3 player as an argument?
OH NO.. you can share music, but only get to listen to it a couple times
I assume you're trying to ridicule the people who comment on that ridiculous restriction...please tell me: what's the purpose of that restriction if appearantly I can move my music back to the pc or anyone's pc for that matter...?
BTW, you can do the same (copy songs to any pc without special software) with an iPod , you just won't have the nice filenames. So really strictly speaking, that's not a valid argument either....my unreliable ipods...rebuild...because of data corruption or sync error
I have enjoyed iPods for years, I'm on my second one (lost the first in a fire and no, the iPod didn't cause it) and never had to rebuild mine. Now, I could just as easily make a generalization based on my experience...actually, let me give it a try...
hey, both my iPods work perfectly, hence all iPods must work perfectly and be super reliable, so you must be a total retard for screwing up both your iPods...
just as general as yours... based on just as much personal experience as yours... and just as wrong, I'm sure, as yours...
(while I'm on a roll: if the fraction of troublesome iPods is enough to declare the product "unreliable", then what would you label, based on the widespread reports, the MS Xbox 360?)
My main reason for having an iPod has nothing to do with Apple, nothing to do with the design or appearance of the iPod, but everything with the available space (first had the 60GB, now have the 80GB), and iPod is the only one to offer those volumes. (Which doesn't mean I would change if somebody else would have a large(r) player to offer).
My point? my choice nor my (counter-)arguments were inspired by fan-boy'ism, but judging from the general tone of your post, both your choice in product as decision to reply in this thread are
of course anybody looking at the poster will connect it with the Apple iPod, ffs, it's an iPod accessory...connecting it with the iPod is what you're supposed to do (and not only with the poster, but also with the actual product!)
the question is: is it reasonable to expect an average reader will connect the add with Apple/think it's an Apple product. The answer to that is no: "Ann Summers" is very readable on the poster, and since it's a big chain in the UK, there's no real chance of that.
based on personal experience, let me tell you what the total cost of supporting an additional OS entails:
1) a couple of hours for someone to make a master install image for each of the hardware configurations. [No hardware troubleshooting will be required for two reasons: first off, the particular configuration has been tested when the master was made, so no hardware troubleshooting would occur. Secondly, you don't actually think there are any serious tests done after installation of the image, do you?]
2) some time so some people can (re-)write the tech-/helpdesk scriptbooks for the new OS. Although, copy/paste from appropriate documents, articles or how-tos gets you a long way I would imagine.
that's it...there's no re-education of tech people, they just read from scripts on the phone or copy/paste (or just click) the appropriate message on chat.
OK, there are a couple of people, the technological last line (ie their "think-tank" of problem solvers) who (assuming they are not already knowledgeable) might need some crash courses.
So as you can see, the cost to Dell is very marginal.
In fact, (again, based on my experience with (the quality of) Dell support) I hope they didn't spend any serious money on their already existing Windows support....speculate...on whether Dell sells more systems with Windows support, or more with Ubuntu support.
That's easy...Windows support of course: the vast majority of people who'd buy an Ubuntu computer from Dell, will do their own support and will only contact Dell if/when they really have to (= have to have a part replaced under warranty)
Isn't KaZaA proprietary, so wouldn't the MediaSentry software one way or the other infringe on Kazaa copyrights? Reverse engineering, copyright infringements, blahblahblah bye bye MediaSentry...
if people create intellectual property they have the right...
and just how much intellectual property has the MAFFIAA created?
Unless, of yourse you are some hippie communist who thinks that the contents of a musician or software develoeprs brain are not theirs?
As it turns out, the MAFFIAA and software corporations like Microsoft seem to be hippie communists as they think that the contents of musician or software developer belongs to them, after all, they collect, often without paying the "artists"
I don't want make this a personal attack, however: English is not my mother tongue, but I manage to type correctly and construct correct sentences...so so should you
Maybe if you stop shilling for a second, you might realize, or find out by reading that what you are referring to is not stealing but copyright infringement...if it is most definitely Empire/Sith evil, why do you infantile shillers always feel the need to call it something it isn't?
Maybe because what it actually is, isn't so severe...maybe because people might realize all this MAFFIAA crap is so out of proportion and ridiculous?
I know it's a shill and this is off-topic, but I can't resist...
I guess even keeping "the kids" away from offensive lyrics and listening to good, earnest Christian rock with mom and dad didn't prevent them from becoming bad (copyright infringing) seeds:D
on a slightly less (but only slightly) silly note: IF you were to open a "family music" music store, you deserve to go bankrupt...
well, it's not like they're doing a bang up job at delaying the inevitable then...most games I know can be downloaded, all cracked and ready to go before Day-0
Because I bet plenty DVDs with a dark/light square (after activation of course) will still not be read correctly and so plenty of customers will have to go back to the store and complain/exchange because their legally purchased product is not functioning correctly.
How about this low-tech idea? You put 1 empty box on the shelves, so people can read the cover and read/check out the features (like they can now) and if they want to buy the DVD/cd/game/..., they take a coupon for this particular item (obviously available on the shelf as well), and when done shopping, go to the counter, hand over (all) the coupon(s), a clerk gets their items, they pay...
Less shelf space required, 0 chance for theft and no need to invest in new, expensive hardware...
I consider myself a rather intelligent person, but I so totally can't understand this antitrust/monopoly cries...
antitrust/monopoly laws are there to protect consumers (who, in case of a monopoly don't have a choice (of product or price) and the (main) reason is that a company can charge whatever they want without any serious repercussion and/or sell a product that lacks quality (again, without a significant repercussion in sales))
In this model, it's companies that want to buy ads that are customers, not the general public. But even taking that into consideration:
1) there are other search engines
2) how much information will be able to gather about particular surfers with the help of doubleclick is an interesting question and whether it's an acceptable thing definitely is a discussion worth having, however, it is not relevant for the monopoly/antitrust discussion
3) A monopoly in and by itself is not illegal, the law just stipulates as a monopolist, you have to tread more carefully with what/how you do things: unlike Microsoft with their propriety formats, refusing to give out proper documentation (see look up vs Microsoft) at a reasonable price, etc..., a possible monopoly of Google would not prevent anybody else from starting their own search engine or selling ads. In fact, I don't see an easy way for Google to misuse a possible monopoly to prevent or hinder competition. (Only if they would for example make YouTube inaccessible for other search engines or things like that)
So, can somebody, without using any FUD, tell me exactly why there are antitrust/monopoly issues with Google buying DoubleClick?
let's not forget the almost 100.000 people that weren't allowed to vote (although they should have been), of which more than 90% would have voted democrate.
or the fact that the machines that returned your ballot (so you could redo it) in case it wasn't entirely correctly punched or whatever, were mainly distributed to (richer white =) republican counties and the machines that simply ate defected ballots and not even gave a warning were sent mainly to (poor black/hispanic=) democratic counties...
I can only speak from my experience, which is Belgium:
ballots are as follows: each candidate has a black square next to his name, with an blank circle in the middle. Each political party gets a column, with 20-30 people on it.
You color 1 or more circles (from the same column) with a red pencil.
The ballots are usually up to 50x90 cm, as there are many (try 7 to 10) different parties (columns) with each a bunch of names (20 to 30)
So, to answer your question:
1) it would eliminate these huge ballots (btw, there's 3 of those: senate, parliament and province) which are not handy. Although that isn't a compelling argument for younger people. There are many older people have trouble finding what party or person they want to vote for, which does make for a pretty compelling argument.
2) miscounts...votes are counted manually, human error simply can't be eliminated. (which results in any district having an even remotely close race, one or other party demanding a recount, which usually gives a (slightly) different result, which opens the door for yet another recount, etc...)
3) speed (in counting as well as voting)
now, as far as your "either you're an idiot, or you haven't thought about the problem properly, or you have a vested interest" issue...you shouldn't talk like that when using 3 absolutely ridiculous arguments...
1) no, it isn't a lot more complex than it appears at first sight (if you want to counter this, please do more than reply "guess you haven't thought it through" and actually provide some proof or facts for your rather wild statement.
Voting isn't more complex: you select one or more people, whether you do it by filling a circle next to the person(s) name(s) using a pencil, or by pushing a circle or box on a touch screen or by selecting name(s) with a mouse...same difference.
2) "Many computer and system programmers, developers and PMs are idiots. They don't have the resources to do a good job." whether it should be "some..." or "many...", I won't argue over, but surely you should see it coming from the start: doesn't matter how many crappy programmers (btw, a developer in IT = a programmer) there are or how much of an idiot they are, you ask some of the ones that aren't to do the job...and as you already stated yourself, even if many are idiots, some are not (otherwise you should have used "all") so this wouldn't hinder a good implementation at all, just hire some of the non-idiots
3) might this be related to voting being more complex than you'd think at first glance? as for there being no reason to switch, see the first part of my post, I already answered that.
as for the task of replacing the terrible, terrible mechanism/device of ballot boxes...I'll give it a shot:
you get there, show id, and instead of getting one or more big ballots, you're handed a small credit card sized (smart)card.
You enter the booth, slide it in a reader (I'll handle the computer part later), the voting screen pops up, allows you to search for people alphabetically as well as by party, allows you to select people, gives you an overview of your vote before asking for confirmation. When you confirm, your vote gets registered internally in the computer, encrypted on your (smart)card, (which replaces the piece of paper with a stamp you get now as proof that you were there (in Belgium, you're obligated to vote)) which you get to take home and which works as a digital backup for you
Also a piece of paper is printed out, with your vote, which you put in a box (just as you do with the ballot now).
These boxes are the backup/proof for the election, throughout the country, some, at random, should be selected to be counted manually and compare with the electronic results on the computer(s). If same, all is well, if different, obviously more manually counts are required (which still is better than it is now, the counting would be the same (manually), the voting would be better), but
Slashdot Mirror
seems to me, being an American hating communist is much better than being a fat, ignorant, misguided self-righteous, "my dollars are worth so much less compared to the euro", "I watch Fox News and think I am informed", "I really believe the war in Iraq is not about oil", laughingstock of the rest of the world American...
sure, why don't you just google it? then you can read plenty of reasons
(I'm sorry, I moved to the United States recently, and missed the whole REAL ID Act legislation got passed in 2005)
:-))) and nobody in Europe is complaining those passports are used to "track everyone".]
:-)
I for one am definitely against anything "Big Brother". However, as far as I have been able to read up on this (a lot of articles have tons of fluff or otherwise useless information), I don't see the Big Brother angle or why people are so against a sort of national ID...
This is what I (think I) know:
1) all states should put the same information on the ID/license (in fact, there are only minimal guidelines, states could put more, but even if it would be a strict list (-> all of these and nothing but)).
2) all states should have the same (document) requirements to issue an ID/license.
3) states should share their motor vehicle database with the other states.
[Btw, The countries part of the European Union have a "unified" passport, in fact, apart from specification of country of origin (in several ways, some to help prevent counterfeits, most of which were demanded by the US after 9/11 (not meant as a complaint, just giving some "historical" information
I guess my question is: what do people have against a national ID?
Provided it is just that...meaning the 50 different state ID/license designs are replaced with one, uniform ID/license (for example with a map of the US on the background and the issuing state highlighted, as well as noted in writing on the ID/license), the same information is displayed in the same way, optionally additional information each state wishes to add is on the back, etc...
I don't see how just uniforming the information on and look of the ID/license would help or even facilitate "tracking" everyone...seems to be me it would be just as down right easy now, since my RI driver's license identifies me just as uniquely now as would a National driver's license (or my green card for that matter)
My main reason for asking is: as far as I can tell, there are no negative, only positive side-effects to a national ID/license (that assertion is based on what I know about it). Since so many are adamant against it, I feel I must be missing something, since I am at least as anti-Big Brother as the next guy
by all means, turn the thing upside down...in fact, that's pretty much the only thing you can do......however it doesn't fly buddy.
People like you claim there is a God, so it's up to people like you to prove that God exists, not others who disagree to proof you're wrong. People like you are the ones making a claim (God exists) so the burden of proof is on you...
If you had your way, you can't complain about this one: I believe you are a pedophile..."If you'd like to refute that, I'll need proof that" you aren't. "Have fun with that."
Well, "us" in Western Europe value freedom of speech as well (in fact, one could argue we value freedom more in general, as in the past decade we don't seem to be passing many laws to limit the freedom of our citizens, but that's another discussion), yet there is no creationism museum over here... nor are there any schools where darwinism is not taught or has to compete with creationism...
I'm not an Apple or iPod fan boy, but...
...my unreliable ipods...rebuild...because of data corruption or sync error
are you actually using the fact whether or not you can listen to radio on your mp3 player as an argument?
OH NO.. you can share music, but only get to listen to it a couple times
I assume you're trying to ridicule the people who comment on that ridiculous restriction...please tell me: what's the purpose of that restriction if appearantly I can move my music back to the pc or anyone's pc for that matter...?
BTW, you can do the same (copy songs to any pc without special software) with an iPod , you just won't have the nice filenames. So really strictly speaking, that's not a valid argument either.
I have enjoyed iPods for years, I'm on my second one (lost the first in a fire and no, the iPod didn't cause it) and never had to rebuild mine. Now, I could just as easily make a generalization based on my experience...actually, let me give it a try...
hey, both my iPods work perfectly, hence all iPods must work perfectly and be super reliable, so you must be a total retard for screwing up both your iPods...
just as general as yours...
based on just as much personal experience as yours...
and just as wrong, I'm sure, as yours...
(while I'm on a roll: if the fraction of troublesome iPods is enough to declare the product "unreliable", then what would you label, based on the widespread reports, the MS Xbox 360?)
My main reason for having an iPod has nothing to do with Apple, nothing to do with the design or appearance of the iPod, but everything with the available space (first had the 60GB, now have the 80GB), and iPod is the only one to offer those volumes. (Which doesn't mean I would change if somebody else would have a large(r) player to offer).
My point? my choice nor my (counter-)arguments were inspired by fan-boy'ism, but judging from the general tone of your post, both your choice in product as decision to reply in this thread are
that's not the right question though...
of course anybody looking at the poster will connect it with the Apple iPod, ffs, it's an iPod accessory...connecting it with the iPod is what you're supposed to do (and not only with the poster, but also with the actual product!)
the question is: is it reasonable to expect an average reader will connect the add with Apple/think it's an Apple product. The answer to that is no: "Ann Summers" is very readable on the poster, and since it's a big chain in the UK, there's no real chance of that.
special effects you mean a boob job?
thank god the "experts" at the apple product store are absolutely convinced Apple has an airtight case here...I was starting to worry nobody did
cost difference...customer support
...speculate...on whether Dell sells more systems with Windows support, or more with Ubuntu support.
based on personal experience, let me tell you what the total cost of supporting an additional OS entails:
1) a couple of hours for someone to make a master install image for each of the hardware configurations. [No hardware troubleshooting will be required for two reasons: first off, the particular configuration has been tested when the master was made, so no hardware troubleshooting would occur. Secondly, you don't actually think there are any serious tests done after installation of the image, do you?]
2) some time so some people can (re-)write the tech-/helpdesk scriptbooks for the new OS. Although, copy/paste from appropriate documents, articles or how-tos gets you a long way I would imagine.
that's it...there's no re-education of tech people, they just read from scripts on the phone or copy/paste (or just click) the appropriate message on chat.
OK, there are a couple of people, the technological last line (ie their "think-tank" of problem solvers) who (assuming they are not already knowledgeable) might need some crash courses.
So as you can see, the cost to Dell is very marginal.
In fact, (again, based on my experience with (the quality of) Dell support) I hope they didn't spend any serious money on their already existing Windows support.
That's easy...Windows support of course: the vast majority of people who'd buy an Ubuntu computer from Dell, will do their own support and will only contact Dell if/when they really have to (= have to have a part replaced under warranty)
I wonder....are those fungi ramen or varelse?
Here's a thought...
there are plenty of people out there who use it for it's intended purpose: to play games they paid for, and yet still have a modded xbox
uh oh, there goes your brilliant argument, and your justification for calling them losers...
however, with every new OS they make, they force people to get new, more powerful hardware
Isn't KaZaA proprietary, so wouldn't the MediaSentry software one way or the other infringe on Kazaa copyrights? Reverse engineering, copyright infringements, blahblahblah bye bye MediaSentry...
wouldn't that be hilarious?
if people create intellectual property they have the right...
and just how much intellectual property has the MAFFIAA created?
Unless, of yourse you are some hippie communist who thinks that the contents of a musician or software develoeprs brain are not theirs?
As it turns out, the MAFFIAA and software corporations like Microsoft seem to be hippie communists as they think that the contents of musician or software developer belongs to them, after all, they collect, often without paying the "artists"
I don't want make this a personal attack, however: English is not my mother tongue, but I manage to type correctly and construct correct sentences...so so should you
Maybe if you stop shilling for a second, you might realize, or find out by reading that what you are referring to is not stealing but copyright infringement...if it is most definitely Empire/Sith evil, why do you infantile shillers always feel the need to call it something it isn't?
Maybe because what it actually is, isn't so severe...maybe because people might realize all this MAFFIAA crap is so out of proportion and ridiculous?
I know it's a shill and this is off-topic, but I can't resist...
:D
I guess even keeping "the kids" away from offensive lyrics and listening to good, earnest Christian rock with mom and dad didn't prevent them from becoming bad (copyright infringing) seeds
on a slightly less (but only slightly) silly note: IF you were to open a "family music" music store, you deserve to go bankrupt...
well, it's not like they're doing a bang up job at delaying the inevitable then...most games I know can be downloaded, all cracked and ready to go before Day-0
Because I bet plenty DVDs with a dark/light square (after activation of course) will still not be read correctly and so plenty of customers will have to go back to the store and complain/exchange because their legally purchased product is not functioning correctly.
How about this low-tech idea? You put 1 empty box on the shelves, so people can read the cover and read/check out the features (like they can now) and if they want to buy the DVD/cd/game/..., they take a coupon for this particular item (obviously available on the shelf as well), and when done shopping, go to the counter, hand over (all) the coupon(s), a clerk gets their items, they pay...
Less shelf space required, 0 chance for theft and no need to invest in new, expensive hardware...
yes...try 09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 88 c0
I consider myself a rather intelligent person, but I so totally can't understand this antitrust/monopoly cries...
antitrust/monopoly laws are there to protect consumers (who, in case of a monopoly don't have a choice (of product or price) and the (main) reason is that a company can charge whatever they want without any serious repercussion and/or sell a product that lacks quality (again, without a significant repercussion in sales))
In this model, it's companies that want to buy ads that are customers, not the general public. But even taking that into consideration:
1) there are other search engines
2) how much information will be able to gather about particular surfers with the help of doubleclick is an interesting question and whether it's an acceptable thing definitely is a discussion worth having, however, it is not relevant for the monopoly/antitrust discussion
3) A monopoly in and by itself is not illegal, the law just stipulates as a monopolist, you have to tread more carefully with what/how you do things: unlike Microsoft with their propriety formats, refusing to give out proper documentation (see look up vs Microsoft) at a reasonable price, etc..., a possible monopoly of Google would not prevent anybody else from starting their own search engine or selling ads. In fact, I don't see an easy way for Google to misuse a possible monopoly to prevent or hinder competition. (Only if they would for example make YouTube inaccessible for other search engines or things like that)
So, can somebody, without using any FUD, tell me exactly why there are antitrust/monopoly issues with Google buying DoubleClick?
sure,
let's not forget the almost 100.000 people that weren't allowed to vote (although they should have been), of which more than 90% would have voted democrate.
or the fact that the machines that returned your ballot (so you could redo it) in case it wasn't entirely correctly punched or whatever, were mainly distributed to (richer white =) republican counties and the machines that simply ate defected ballots and not even gave a warning were sent mainly to (poor black/hispanic=) democratic counties...
I can only speak from my experience, which is Belgium:
ballots are as follows: each candidate has a black square next to his name, with an blank circle in the middle. Each political party gets a column, with 20-30 people on it.
You color 1 or more circles (from the same column) with a red pencil.
The ballots are usually up to 50x90 cm, as there are many (try 7 to 10) different parties (columns) with each a bunch of names (20 to 30)
So, to answer your question:
1) it would eliminate these huge ballots (btw, there's 3 of those: senate, parliament and province) which are not handy. Although that isn't a compelling argument for younger people. There are many older people have trouble finding what party or person they want to vote for, which does make for a pretty compelling argument.
2) miscounts...votes are counted manually, human error simply can't be eliminated. (which results in any district having an even remotely close race, one or other party demanding a recount, which usually gives a (slightly) different result, which opens the door for yet another recount, etc...)
3) speed (in counting as well as voting)
now, as far as your "either you're an idiot, or you haven't thought about the problem properly, or you have a vested interest" issue...you shouldn't talk like that when using 3 absolutely ridiculous arguments...
1) no, it isn't a lot more complex than it appears at first sight (if you want to counter this, please do more than reply "guess you haven't thought it through" and actually provide some proof or facts for your rather wild statement.
Voting isn't more complex: you select one or more people, whether you do it by filling a circle next to the person(s) name(s) using a pencil, or by pushing a circle or box on a touch screen or by selecting name(s) with a mouse...same difference.
2) "Many computer and system programmers, developers and PMs are idiots. They don't have the resources to do a good job." whether it should be "some..." or "many...", I won't argue over, but surely you should see it coming from the start: doesn't matter how many crappy programmers (btw, a developer in IT = a programmer) there are or how much of an idiot they are, you ask some of the ones that aren't to do the job...and as you already stated yourself, even if many are idiots, some are not (otherwise you should have used "all") so this wouldn't hinder a good implementation at all, just hire some of the non-idiots
3) might this be related to voting being more complex than you'd think at first glance? as for there being no reason to switch, see the first part of my post, I already answered that.
as for the task of replacing the terrible, terrible mechanism/device of ballot boxes...I'll give it a shot:
you get there, show id, and instead of getting one or more big ballots, you're handed a small credit card sized (smart)card.
You enter the booth, slide it in a reader (I'll handle the computer part later), the voting screen pops up, allows you to search for people alphabetically as well as by party, allows you to select people, gives you an overview of your vote before asking for confirmation.
When you confirm, your vote gets registered internally in the computer, encrypted on your (smart)card, (which replaces the piece of paper with a stamp you get now as proof that you were there (in Belgium, you're obligated to vote)) which you get to take home and which works as a digital backup for you
Also a piece of paper is printed out, with your vote, which you put in a box (just as you do with the ballot now).
These boxes are the backup/proof for the election, throughout the country, some, at random, should be selected to be counted manually and compare with the electronic results on the computer(s). If same, all is well, if different, obviously more manually counts are required (which still is better than it is now, the counting would be the same (manually), the voting would be better), but